Redskins "Low-balling" Hall (Allegedly)

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by vallin21

You're serious?

What is it that you don't trust about Hall. It can't be his hands, or his coverage ability. Carlos Rogers is probably not even in the top 25 at the CB position. When you get benched for a guy who plays 4 games per season and a CB who you got off waivers in freakin November I think thats telling you something dude.

What it tells me is that our coordinator on that side of the ball is clueless.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

What it tells me is that our coordinator on that side of the ball is clueless.

yeah i've never figured out why Blache put Los on the pine. There's a story there and i'm surprised it's stayed private this long... initially i thought Blache and/or Grey might have benched Los in a weird stunt to get him seeing the game differently, slower and calmer, which would help him see the ball better and actually get it into his hands (i know this is improbable and a little bizarre but it's all i came up with). Los makes a nice INT the very next game, showing improvement and promise, but still we hear rumors of a trade. It's puzzling to say the least.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by The Goat

yeah i've never figured out why Blache put Los on the pine. There's a story there and i'm surprised it's stayed private this long... initially i thought Blache and/or Grey might have benched Los in a weird stunt to get him seeing the game differently, slower and calmer, which would help him see the ball better and actually get it into his hands (i know this is improbable and a little bizarre but it's all i came up with). Los makes a nice INT the very next game, showing improvement and promise, but still we hear rumors of a trade. It's puzzling to say the least.

And it's retarded to say the most.

I hear the phrase "I hope I'm not reading into this too much" often, but in this case, I really hope I'm not reading into this enough. Because on the surface, what you have is a top ten -- maybe top fifteen depending on how much you value the ability to not drop three INTs per year -- CB in the NFL, who can't start because our stupid coordinator has a fetish with house blitzes and DeAngelo Hall.

Not saying that Hall didn't deserve to play based on how he was playing at the end of last year. I am saying that I don't expect him to ever play that well for a full season again in his career (it was still a down year for him if we take in the Oakland data), and we could have started both Rogers and Hall. But god forbid we actually play our best players.

Which means that the conditions seem right for an inside story here that simply haven't hit the papers. Maybe Rogers kicked Blache's dog or something. Because this fight is stupid and it's killing our secondary.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

What it tells me is that our coordinator on that side of the ball is clueless.

I know you're not a fan of Blache but I think it's a stretch to call him clueless. If that's the case then we must have a hella talented team to overcome his cluelessness.

He must have had his reasons for benching Carlos, and they are reasons we'll probably never know.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Re-sign Hall, then cut Springs (who can't stay on the field anyway). Problem solved. Hall & Rogers start.

[John Hop]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Re-sign Hall, then cut Springs (who can't stay on the field anyway). Problem solved. Hall & Rogers start.

that's probably what we should do.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I know you're not a fan of Blache but I think it's a stretch to call him clueless. If that's the case then we must have a hella talented team to overcome his cluelessness.

He must have had his reasons for benching Carlos, and they are reasons we'll probably never know.

The act was one of cluelessness. One act does not define a man, but what scares me is that his reasons most likely weren't good reasons.

It's true that we don't know what they were. He's never come out and actually justified his reasoning. He's just sort of dodged the issue and openly worked to trade him.

I think he should man up and handle the issue like an adult, but I'd be cool if we just fired him.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

The act was one of cluelessness. One act does not define a man, but what scares me is that his reasons most likely weren't good reasons.

It's true that we don't know what they were. He's never come out and actually justified his reasoning. He's just sort of dodged the issue and openly worked to trade him.

I think he should man up and handle the issue like an adult, but I'd be cool if we just fired him.

If you don't know what those reasons were, how can you say they likely weren't good reasons??

I guess the easy thing to do around here is to just assume the worst. And for some reasons the players are always the ones in the right. I don't get it. Even going back to the whole Arrington fiasco a lot of people were so convinced it was the coaches screwing him over and Arrington was somehow an innocent victim. Perhaps this happens because we rarely hear the coach's side of things, and it's always the players spouting off in the media.